Re: "stuck spinlock"
| От | Tom Lane | 
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: "stuck spinlock" | 
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 8048.1386946326@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст | 
| Ответ на | Re: "stuck spinlock" (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>) | 
| Ответы | Re: "stuck spinlock" Re: "stuck spinlock" | 
| Список | pgsql-hackers | 
Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> Tom, could this be caused by c357be2cd9434c70904d871d9b96828b31a50cc5?
> Specifically the added CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() in handle_sig_alarm()?
> ISTM nothing is preventing us from jumping out of code holding a
> spinlock?
Hm ... what should stop it is that ImmediateInterruptOK wouldn't be
set while we're messing with any spinlocks.  Except that ProcessInterrupts
doesn't check that gating condition :-(.  I think you're probably right:
what should be in the interrupt handler is something like
"if (ImmediateInterruptOK) CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS();"
        regards, tom lane
		
	В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: